Skip to content

RDKBWIFI-202: Implementation of Traffic Separation in unified-wifi-mesh#397

Open
siddharth-nair-dtdl wants to merge 1 commit intordkcentral:developfrom
siddharth-nair-dtdl:RDKBWIFI-202
Open

RDKBWIFI-202: Implementation of Traffic Separation in unified-wifi-mesh#397
siddharth-nair-dtdl wants to merge 1 commit intordkcentral:developfrom
siddharth-nair-dtdl:RDKBWIFI-202

Conversation

@siddharth-nair-dtdl
Copy link

Reason for change: Added traffic seperation TLV implementation
Test Procedure: Verify build is successfull and check if traffic seperation is functional
Risks: Medium
Priority: P2

Reason for change: Added traffic seperation TLV implementation
Test Procedure: Verify build is successfull and check if traffic seperation is functional
Risks: Medium
Priority: P2
{
"InterfaceName": "wifi2.2",
"Bridge": "brlan0",
"Bridge": "brlan2",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does it impact the default use case.right now we do use brlan0 bridge.

Copy link

@sundaresh-k-oss sundaresh-k-oss Jan 29, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes @cpokuru . It will impact the default use case.
Planned the bridges for below interfaces:
brlan0 - private ssid and LAN clients.
brlan1 - mesh_backhaul ssid
brlan2 - iot_ssid

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is the impact to the default use cases?

@cpokuru
Copy link
Contributor

cpokuru commented Feb 9, 2026

As per our discussion in our meeting.we can take this further once use case tested with extender devices.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants